Ideology, decision making, and survival in the nonprofit sector: A field study of the Jewish response to antisemitism in the black community

This dissertation is about how nonprofit organizations (NPOs) make decisions in a highly ideological environment, and how ideology influences their decision-making, service delivery to their constituency, and ultimately, their organizational survival. The principal data for this study came from a field study of four Jewish advocacy organizations (JAOs). The context for analyzing this data was their decision-making response to three antisemitic incidents involving the Black community between 1992 and 1994. Three of the advocacy organizations are nationally affiliated, and one is a local agency.;The incidents were: the withdrawal by a Jewish organization from an exhibit on 365 years of Black/Jewish history; a book compiled by the Nation of Islam and used as a textbook in a Black studies program at a private college; and a speech by the leader of the Nation of Islam at the state university. Data were collected through interviews with key individuals in each incident, and the analysis of organizational archives and relevant documents.;The results of this study show that the decision-making by these JAOs was strongly influenced by their ideology in combination with an oligarchic lay leadership. Their ideology was historically, in all cases, built around combatting the problem of antisemitism. Antisemitism continues to dominate the ideology of these JAOs, in spite of the fact that it is at its lowest point in U.S. history. This ideological dominance by a central issue poses a substantial challenge for NPOs when they contemplate shifting their organizational focus to other issues, thereby assuring their survival. Three paradigms of organizational continuity are examined, and the implications they carry for the JAOs specifically, and NPOs generally.